Everyone else has jumped on you for this, but...seriously: do you really think books are one-off disposables? Really?!?!? I've got an extensive library and I read a ton of content every week. I have a lot of favorites I have read a second, third or sometimes even fourth time. I have reference books and informational books I draw upon time and again. Who reads a book twice? People who read, that's who.

Set up facebook....link to a sacrificial email account. Offer as little personal data as you can (make 'em work for it) and then post a new pic of your kid once a year like I do for gandma. Never, ever bother to check it more than once a year, and never go back to the dummy email you set up.

It doesn't take much effort to figure out that if you bought a Wii for your 9 year old in 2007, then you'll be upgrading to an Xbox or Ps4 in 2014 for your 16 year old. This is not a static audience...and the Wii is looking very old now to new 9 year olds with their android tablets.

Yes, but the Earth is a geologically active world with a lot of churn, an atmosphere and constant active chemistry going on. The moon changes very little over the course of its life outside of occasional impacts. Barring that issue, I think from what i recall the Theia collision theory models around the idea of a large planet effective broadsiding Earth, and pulling off a significant chunk of crust as it does so. The models all seem to suggest that the vast majority of the debris forms the moon itself, while Earth loses some mass but keeps on going. But disclaimer: IAAAA (I am an armchair astronomer) so take it all with a grain of salt; but I'm pretty sure that we have a lot of specific factors that make finding remnants of this collision on Earth really difficult, vs. on the moon where nothing ever really changes even on a geologic clock.

Going to venture a guess that someone who is confused about the naming conventions in scientific process of hypothetical worlds (or anything, for that matter) probably has no business rooting around in such articles; they've got bigger, more remedial issues to work out. The article is fine; it does not need to dumb down the conversation to explain something so obvious to anyone who has even a modicum of understanding in basic astronomy.

Your tale was the scariest goddamn thing I've read all year.

I think by that criteria he failed 2 out of 3 then. Abrhams made a Star Trek that didn't outsmart anyone: it confused, annoyed and disrespected its audience more than anything. Did he make us think about it for a long time after? I'd venture to suggest that people dwelling on the starship-sized plot holes is not quite what you intended, and suggest that no, these films were essentially irrelevant. That's a shame, because by contrast I still think about and enjoy the original films and many of the TV episodes, but the two latest movies were spectacle without substance. I'll agree his ST take was popcorn-at-the-movies-bam-wow-wizbang entertaining, though.

Marvel's stories have always been parables about racisim and homophobia, using mutants and superheroes as a cypher to teach kids that it's not okay to discriminate and to entertain old cheeto-stained adults (disclaimer: I pick up about 40 comics a month, but admit I am not actually cheeto-stained so I have not not been living up to the standard I set for our kind). They are not parables about ways to make sure that health concerns caused by misinformed individuals do not blow up in our face and cause loss of life. Terrible article premise, sorry.

Or you could, you know, have more realistic standards and just look for a gal who's decent if not a barbie super star, also likes video games, and enjoys a good shut-in away from the plebians as much as you do. There are plenty of nerdy gals out there....but the real problem is that men have a weird disconnect between "who I am" and "what I deserve" in our society. Every buddy of mine I've ever known who has made it to his forties (and in two cases fifties) single and unwed (or divorced) have a common habit of always, inevitably believing that only the finest, most knock-out amazing women are good enough for them. These women must not only be attractive but they must be agreeable, great servants, wonderful conversationalists and also be doting. If they fail to meet that criteria, then something is wrong with them and out the door they go. Where does this come from? Each of these guys is facing a lonely tenure at the end of their life, while admiring myself and other friends who have a wife and kids, because we "got lucky." But I didn't get lucky...I just realized that I needed to find a woman who was like myself, or close enough to accept who I was, and was happy do so because....and this is where it gets hard for guys who are part of the "culture of misogyny" to understand...because I also accepted her for who she was. That mutual acceptance is really damned important. But who knows, maybe my buddies who are facing their alone years in their waning decades are happy; they never could find someone they could just accept...and be accepted by. Instead, they have created a wall of perfection that can never be scaled, and maybe secretly that's how they wanted it.

It's hard to take this comment as anything other than mild trolling, even if it's unintentional.

You must not engage much on the creative side, as your view sounds like one who is very much good at consuming rather than producing. Speaking as someone who'd love to write more, I find that this plebian real job I have makes that damned difficult. I can safely say that if anything, writing and making money at it can only assure you of increase in volume; quality will come from the author, not whether or not he's motivated exclusively by financial needs.

No no no, he's just pointing out that he prefers to look to the past rather than the future. Also, that he's too cheap and lacking in personal momentum to bother picking something up that isn't out of copyright, near as I can tell. Or, in other words, totally irrelevant to the issue at hand.

I think Charles' target audience is for people who hunger for something new. Just sayin' you're not his target audience. Enjoy reading Wells and all the other out-of-copyright classics, I'll be reading some fiction that's of more than literary historical significance while you do that.

Bad analogy. This kid's doing the "driving equivalent" of jumping lanes and driving into traffic because it's fun to see people swerve out of his way. And then slash-dotters here are defending him on the grounds that people driving in one direction should assume that other people will be driving down the wrong lane toward them so its their fault for not double checking before going out. Geez......guess this one must touch some people in their dark naughty bits with all the defense this guy's getting.

2080 sigh 1080 no edit button d'oh